The concerning use of Stockholm syndrome in romantic storylines
By: Rose, Year 11
In the field of romance in novels, we, as readers, encounter countless numbers of sub-genres of romance. Whether we like it or not, the concept of ‘Stockholm syndrome’ is embedded in the genre of romance called ‘captive love’. A cannibalistic psychopath manipulating their victim into falling in love with them; a victim developing feelings for their kidnapper after weeks of being held captive; an abuser being protected by their victim in lawsuit trials: these are all examples of ‘Stockholm syndrome’ plots represented in novels.
The concept of Stockholm syndrome is named after a bank robbery in Stockholm, Sweden when four hostages refused to testify against their captor. From then onwards, it’s defined as a condition or theory that explains why hostages sometimes develop a deep psychological bond with their abuser or captor. In recent years, ‘Stockholm syndrome’ has been included in sub-genres of romance, but many criticize that these novels primarily justify and desensitize obsessive and abusive behaviors in relationships, especially for young female readers. Forced captivity and stalking, alongside other dangerous behaviors shown in novels to curate the image of a ‘bad boy’ prevents the formation of healthy relationships and misleads readers into perceiving abuse for passion.
Whilst many authors intend to spread awareness by portraying the power imbalance where women surrender to masculinity, some authors aren’t as clear with their intentions. One infamous example is the original version of Beauty and the Beast, written by Gabrielle- Suzanne Barbot de Villeneuve. Belle is the quintessential poor girl who falls for a cruel captor and has no independence or character development throughout the novel. Similar to the Disney retelling, Belle is held captive in exchange for freeing her father, but in this version, the Beast asks coercive questions such as “Beauty, will you be my wife?” and “May I sleep with you tonight?” Beauty refuses every night, but fears that his wrath will overtake his calmness in the end. Her father who urges her to “love who loves you,” which pressures Belle into accepting her fate of repaying Beast’s kindness through marriage. This is initially what causes her to develop Stockholm syndrome as she’s left feeling vulnerable and obligated to give herself to the Beast.
The concept of Stockholm syndrome is amplified towards the end of the tale when the Beast is close to death. Belle proclaims to the Beast, “You must not die; live to be my husband. For I thought I had only friendship for you, but the grief I feel now convinces me that I cannot live without you.” This does not express her love for him, only friendship. Her feelings are motivated by fear of befalling her captor, just as the original Stockholm victims feared the bank robbers who kept them as hostages. Her ‘inability’ to live without him suggests how her captivity has left her accustomed to his presence and feels daunted by their mere separation.
Throughout the tale, Belle prioritises the Beast’s needs and desires over her own, which is highlighted when they have dinner together and she says “That is as you please” to his request of seeing him during supper. Belle speaks while ‘trembling,’ emphasising that she doesn’t voice her real opinion in order to survive. Furthermore, her developing any feelings towards the Beast highlights the extent to which Stockholm syndrome has affected her when she was under duress, alone, and unsupported rather than forming a genuine connection with her supposed love interest. Romanticizing the concept of Stockholm syndrome is harmful to young women as it enforces unrealistic ideals about the abusive situations they themselves may be in.
Often, these books end with the female character and the psychotic male lead dating or marrying, which may lead women to believing that being in a relationship with their abuser can end in a ‘happily ever after’ ending because their sadistic behavior is a natural result of their love for their partner. Glorifying these men downplay their abusive and inappropriate behavior, causing young women to simply accept male violence and find their ‘loving intent’ in their abuse. The real question that remains is, what drives authors to explore captivity narratives where women are left traumatized by men?
Comments